Collared to a person vs a household

Collared to a person vs a household (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> General BDSM Discussion

Message

Surrenderwithin -> Collared to a person vs a household (7/31/2008 8:52:28 PM)
For several years now I have ran across the term " Collared to the household". I am sure there is a variance in the meaning of this. However, I would like to hear from some people who use household collars as opposed to a person just collaring someone. What does it mean to you? Why do you elect to do this, or be collared this way? What is the difference, in your opinion, of the traditional ( if there is such a thing) and being collared to a house? Maggi

ProtagonistLily -> RE: Collared to a person vs a household (8/1/2008 12:48:22 AM)
quote: For several years now I have ran across the term " Collared to the household". I am sure there is a variance in the meaning of this. However, I would like to hear from some people who use household collars as opposed to a person just collaring someone. What does it mean to you? Why do you elect to do this, or be collared this way? What is the difference, in your opinion, of the traditional ( if there is such a thing) and being collared to a house? Maggi It means they run a poly household, as opposed to a monogomous one. Some people are cut out for poly, some like me aren't. Neither is 'better' - it's imparative in this neck of the woods that you do a fair amount of introspection, know who you are, decide what you can and can't live with, and stick to your guns. This is a very easy place to fuck yourself if you don't know what your own personal goals and proclivities are. Am I saying that people can't get educated and change their minds? No, not at all. But without introspection and knowing yourself very well, it's easy to talk yourself into situations for what ever reason (sometimes, it's just fatigue of waiting for the right person who fits your goals) that may not mesh with what you know about yourself. Prior to me accepting my collar and contract, Sir and I spent a good amount of time talking about what we both wanted out of this, in fact, I think I asked questions about Polyamory and Monogomy on our first outting together. I know that I'm not someone who's comfortable in a poly situation, and regardless of my attraction to Him, had he said he was looking for a "household", it would have been clear that we were a train wreck waiting to happen. If one thing has guided me true in the 10 years I've been in the scene it's been "To thine own self be true". By being honest about who and what I am, by knowing my own goals and desires, I've been able to make fairly painfree choices. PL

Diphon -> RE: Collared to a person vs a household (8/1/2008 2:29:42 AM)
Despite being poly I would never use the term in question. if you're "Collared to the household" who is your owner? the head of the household sure. but still, when my collar goes around a girls neck she's my property, and my property alone. I may direct her to serve a guest or close friend and would expect her to obey them. But she still belongs to me. it's all a matter of symantics and personel interpretation to others it may make perfect sense. just not they way I think.

LadyPact -> RE: Collared to a person vs a household (8/1/2008 5:00:23 AM)
I'm poly also. Even though I'm head of household, I don't use a collar in terms of collaring to the household. When I collar someone, they are collared to Me. They are not double collared, or owned jointly by Myself and My husband. It's just one of those things that wouldn't work for us.

CallaFirestormBW -> RE: Collared to a person vs a household (8/1/2008 8:01:26 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Surrenderwithin For several years now I have ran across the term " Collared to the household". I am sure there is a variance in the meaning of this. However, I would like to hear from some people who use household collars as opposed to a person just collaring someone. What does it mean to you? Why do you elect to do this, or be collared this way? What is the difference, in your opinion, of the traditional ( if there is such a thing) and being collared to a house? Maggi In our household, it is a requisite that a servant wear a 'house' collar. Any servant that we take on must be able and willing to serve both my Darling and I, and must understand that we freely share between us. For us, retaining the house and its legacy is also a gift of loving memory to a man who will be always in our hearts, despite his atrocious behavior in succumbing to something as plebian as mortality. Our house (at home, we typically capitalize it) is a philosophical expression as much or more than it is a physical place. Accepting a HBW collar comes with a set of ideals that are bound to the name, and accepting the collar implies acceptance of all of the philosophical accoutrements. In the same way, when I accepted my HBW crop, I accepted that same set of ideals, and it impacts how I respond to both the BDSM and 'common' worlds. Calla Firestorm BW

chamberqueen -> RE: Collared to a person vs a household (8/1/2008 10:20:54 AM)
To go along with the last comment, most households have a hierarchy - especially during the training period. Some "houses" may have a dozen or members that come and go. It is important to know the line of command and not to take commands from someone lower in the hierarchy if they are in direct opposition to one you heard from someone higher. For instance, there may be a Master, an alpha female sub or slave who is in charge of the other members when the Master isn't available, then a number of other subs. I know of a sub who had graduated from a house collar to one of his own, and he told me that the worst experience he ever had was having it taken away from him because he followed the instructions of a sub that went against what he had already been told. Living in a "house" can be very fulfilling as long as you know that in most cases you will rarely be the primary. There will probably be a lot more household chores than sessions. At times living can be very communal which is great if you enjoy the "family" feeling. Many prefer the idea of being collared to one owner. This could still end up in a poly situation, or you might not be the only sub, and there could still be a style of hierarchy. It is not unusual for there to be a favorite. The biggest difference is that the subs might never meet each other but always be kept separate. For many the ideal situation is one Dom/one sub. You need to understand your wants and needs. It is not uncommon for a sub to subdue their own ideas of a perfect relationship when they meet a Dom that they really want to spend time with. Then you have to balance what you want the most - that particular Master even if you need to share Him or someone who will give their attention only to you.

CallaFirestormBW -> RE: Collared to a person vs a household (8/1/2008 10:53:17 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Diphon Despite being poly I would never use the term in question. if you're "Collared to the household" who is your owner? the head of the household sure. but still, when my collar goes around a girls neck she's my property, and my property alone. I may direct her to serve a guest or close friend and would expect her to obey them. But she still belongs to me. it's all a matter of symantics and personel interpretation to others it may make perfect sense. just not they way I think. I'd like to address this one comment, because I think that it is an important differentiation between the "house" mentality and the "one owner" mentality in our household. In our household, if you are in a HBW collar, you belong to the house -- which means that your first priority is the sanctity of the group. It also means that you serve any or all of the dominant members of the household, and, as someone else mentioned, take direction from the Head Butler, Chatelaine, or your mentor, as your particular hierarchy requires, but it also means that, instead of your focus being on on particular person, it is the ideals of the house that holds the first priority. In my mind, it requires a little more creativity on the part of a submissive individual, when entering into our collar. It requires that a servant see beyond the specific rules set down by an individual, and think how hir actions will impact the household as a whole. It requires understanding what it is that one is serving -- so there is a greater level of education required for a 'house' servant... xhe needs to understand what the house stands for, and be certain that xhe shares those ideals before xhe can be asked to serve those ideals. To me, collaring to a 'house' in our case is both more substantial (requiring more actions and interactions over the course of a collaring) and more etherial (in that, at the core, it is more like swearing fealty to a country through its queen, or offering one's service to a religious path through its goddess and the ideals that go along with that, rather than offering obedience to single person, concrete and solid, whose words can be heard instead of inferred.) From the dominant individual's end, we do not own an individual servant ... -each and every servant in the household, from the head butler or castelaine to the scullery maid/boy are my responsibility (and the responsibility of every dominant in the household). No one servant is brushed off because xhe belongs to 'someone else'. Likewise, it is up to us to reflect, as clearly as possible, the ideals of the household, in a way that enables our servants to both understand those ideals, and to enable them to desire, with all their hearts, to offer themselves in the service of those ideals. Calla Firestorm

Surrenderwithin -> RE: Collared to a person vs a household (8/1/2008 6:43:53 PM)
These are some wonderful responses and I thank each of you who took the time to address my question. We are poly and have been for many years. We have a hierarchy in our home but I have never thought of my subordinates, nor has Master, as them being collared to the house. I really likes the things Callafirestorm said about the philiosophies and sanctities of the house. We have our own philosophies and sanctities, some spoken, some unspoken that we all uphold. I can certainly understand where you are coming from. Maggi

shiazn03 -> RE: Collared to a person vs a household (8/3/2008 10:40:00 AM)
well, "collared to the household"...it still has the same effects as being collared to the Owner of the household right? i mean, in a sense that you still serve under the Owner, however, in different ways. that's how i see it. it's not that being collared to a household makes it that you don't serve under any particular person, just that your services are focused on the household rather than the actual Owner. [:D]

CallaFirestormBW -> RE: Collared to a person vs a household (8/3/2008 11:28:30 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: shiazn03 well, "collared to the household"...it still has the same effects as being collared to the Owner of the household right? i mean, in a sense that you still serve under the Owner, however, in different ways. that's how i see it. it's not that being collared to a household makes it that you don't serve under any particular person, just that your services are focused on the household rather than the actual Owner. [:D] If you are in a household with one owner, then yes, that certainly applies. I think that where many people get stuck is when you have a household like ours, where there are multiple owners. Unless understanding is established early on, it can be sticky determining who to listen to about what when. In our household, we require that our servants go with the baseline "When in doubt, put the sanctity of the House first." People make mistakes. If there is a conflict in direction, it is important to have a 'fallback' place where a servant can't go wrong when there are multiple people who could be giving orders. In reality, I am the matriarch of our house. That doesn't necessarily mean that I will have the most recent information to always have the final word on any decision... and what happens when someone can't touch base with me when there's a question? If something a servant is being asked to do will not adversely affect the household, even if it isn't a common request, then the 'fallback position' would let them know that they can go ahead and attend to the request and let me know later. If what they're being asked to do would adversely affect the household, they know that they are allowed to refuse to attend to the request with a simple "I am not allowed to do that -- I'll have to check with (my mentor, Miss Firestorm, Miss SilverRose, etc...) before I can comply -- or you are welcome to speak with one of them and have them speak with me." This includes everything from taking the last bottle of Asti or last round of Guatemalan chocolate out of the pantry to things that would harm either the person or reputation of any member of our household, full- or part-time. Calla Firestorm

shiazn03 -> RE: Collared to a person vs a household (8/4/2008 11:57:47 AM)
oh my, that certainly sounds complicated...at least at times anyway... but i bet it's very rewarding when it works out most of the time. [:)] one big happy family! [:D]

Page: [1]

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

3.100586E-02